With the federal Liberals making infrastructure investment a top priority, London North Centre MP Peter Fragiskatos sat down with The Free Press to discuss his party’s perspective, and what it may mean for London — specifically, the city’s rapid transit proposal that will require nearly $200 million in federal cash.

Q: Tell me where infrastructure stands among Liberal priorities, and put it in the context of specific London projects you see as priorities.

A: Infrastructure is a key priority for this government because it’s a key to growing this economy. We have an economy across the country that is experiencing a troubling time right now and we think that infrastructure investment is the way to overcome the challenges that we’re facing.

Q: Why would infrastructure investment overcome those challenges?

A: We know from historic examples that infrastructure investment is the way to overcome challenging economic times, all the way back to the post-war situation across North America. Construct roads, put in railways, on and on we can go with examples. But for me, we have to think about modern infrastructure, and things like public transit meet that need.

Q: But would you agree it would be disappointing to see this money spent on relatively small projects? The roads are being widened anyway, whether city hall or Ottawa pays for it. Is your focus on big projects rather than many small ones?

A: If you look at public transit, it’s not only about putting shovels in the ground and generating jobs. That kind of approach better connects individuals to their city. So if somebody is trying to get to work in London, (but they) don’t have a car (they) have to take the bus (so) they can get to work on time. Beyond that, there’s a social benefit we see with . . . public transit. If someone wants to go see their doctor, see their family, see their friend, they should be able to do so in a timely fashion.

Q: So is it fair to draw the conclusion that London’s rapid transit plan would be your No. 1 infrastructure priority for the city?

A: I think it has to be the priority, absolutely. But beyond that affordable housing is a need, and I consider that to be an infrastructure issue.

Q: I think of the rapid transit plan, $500 million total cost, $129 million coming from the city, so it could be close to $200 million each from Queen’s Park and Ottawa. I consider this as close to a slam dunk as you can get. Am I wrong?

A: We’re still in consultation. The city will contribute $129 million. That’s fine. We still need to talk to the province. The federal government is here to be a partner as well. It’s really the beginning because we need to see what the funding formula will look like from a federal perspective.

Q: As I do the math, the city’s not at that one-third/one-third/one-third funding formula you’d traditionally see in municipal/provincial/federal partnerships. Is that a concern?

A: No, I don’t think so. I think we can get over that and we should get over that. Cities don’t have the tax base the province and federal government does. So I’m not so concerned (about that).

Q: You sound pretty positive about the city’s rapid transit proposal. You sound like a fan.

A: I know there was a divide in this city over which model to adopt (bus-only rapid transit or light-rail/bus hybrid). I think (bus rapid transit) would achieve significant city-building objectives and I’m a supporter of it. This is something that would strongly benefit London.”